Travis County Commissioners Court
October 12, 2004
Item 13
13. Consider and take appropriate action on the following requests: a. A cooperation
agreement between Travis County, continental homes of Texas, l.p. And bell/nash
rathgeber joint venture relating to the design, construction, operation and
maintenance of a public swimming pool in the east metro park; b. A use, operation
and maintenance agreement between Travis County, continental homes of Texas,
l.p., Briarcreek owners association, inc. And bell-nath/rathgeber joint venture;
c. A grant contract with Texas parks & wildlife department for an east metropolitan
park, outdoor recreation grant program in transportation and natural resources
department. A new grant program to provide equipment for the east metropolitan
park; $500,000 grant match met by the construction of a swimming pool by a
third party developer; d. A contract award to the low bidder, c. C. Carlton
industries, ltd., East metro park, phase i, project one, ifb #b040129-jj,
and rejection of all bids for alternate bid items a and g. Can we take these
in the order they are listed?
>> I think that would be fine.
>> okay. A.
>> what -- let me add we finally have liftoff on the east
metro park. [laughter] we have been working with d.r. Horton and rathgeber
on these agreements. We have now done enough design work on the park, the
site improvements and the pool to have some very good estimates on what it
will cost to build all of these and our ability to meet the legal obligations
called for in these contracts. You have seen before these contracts, oh, about
-- probably about five or six months ago. So I知 just going to highlight the
changes that have taken place since then. The concept is that the dr horton
will build at their expense a swimming pool, bath house and septic system
on the park property at east metro park. Travis County will build a site --
the site improvements that service the swimming pool site, meaning getting
the utilities to the site, the parking lot, the fence around the pool, and
support of infrastructure. That is still the concept. The only thing that
has changed is that Travis County will pick up the cost of the -- what we
call the water toys. These are the fountains and the spouts and the things
that the kids play with within the pool. Initially, we are estimating that
those are going to cost about $100,000. Because the pool and the bath house
were coming in above budget, those -- that item was going to get cut out in
order to keep under the $518,000 cap that d.r. Horton had on their -- on their
[indiscernible] cost. We talked to the Texas parks and wildlife about the
grant and the ability to swap items within the grant. And they said it would
be okay for us to use the grant money to pay for the water toys. And then
not do what we had budgeted for a skate park. So with that substitution within
the grant, we are able to keep the water toys within the pool. Which was very
important in the attractiveness of the pool to the community and to -- to
everybody involved. They really thought that that was to attract kids to --
to the -- to the zero entry pool to make it a fun experience. They really
wanted to have those toys as part of the deal. So we were able to do the --
to work things out by the county picking it up and then also paying for it
with the grant money. So these are all kind of interrelated. The other thing
that the county picked up was the septic system. And now having seen the bids
for the park improvements, which is item d, we are confident that we have
got enough savings in the bond money to be able to afford building the septic
system that accommodates the bath house at the pool.
>> so how much of this --
>> how much is what?
>> in a.
>> that's all in a. That's all in a. I知 -- what I知 doing
is describing the scope of a right now. What -- what we are doing and what
d.r. Horton is doing under a. Truly that is only difference in a from what
you have seen in prior draft agreements is that switch in scope. B, again
is almost identical so what you have seen --
>> I知 hoping to approve a once we get done with it.
>> judge. Before we go to -- number one, like say this before
-- before I make this motion. That -- that this is something that's been would
he been dealing with here for a while getting this east metro park online,
of course you know the voters approved the funds for us back in 2001, bond
funds, to make sure this happened. Of course these particular things we are
talking about now and -- including for the swimming pool, a lot of input that
have come from the neighbors in this particular area, where -- where persons
have in the past have been going on over to bastrop to go swimming for an
example. Of course the children in the areas, the adults in the area not really
having a good place to even go through the park to enjoy in that immediate
proximity. With these kind of things I really do appreciate what we are doing
here, going forward. I would like to make a motion to move approval of 13
a.
>> second,.
>> discussion,? All in favor that passes by unanimous vote.
B.
>> b again is the the -- the concept is that this is a subscription
service, this is an agreement with d.r. Horton for the operation and maintenance,
ongoing expenses of the pool. Likely will contract with the ymca or a certified
pool operator, the cost that we pay the ymca to manage this facility will
derive from fees that are charged to the users of the swimming pool for any
developer who pays the capital recovery cost, which is $500 per lot. And entitlements
the lots within the subdivision to have half priced membership in the pool.
What this agreement does is lock that in for -- for brier creek, which is
the development of d.r. Horton and dick rathgeber. That basically is part
of the model on how this all works. Anyone in the area can pay a fee to come
and use the pool. Just that it's -- there's some incentive for people to subscribe
through their homeowners association on a regular basis, so that's -- that's
what this agreement does. For brier creek is provide that they have now, they
charge their homeowners half priced memberships and transfers that revenue
to the county we then turn around and contract with the ymca or like operator
to manage the pool for us.
>> last time we discussed this I thought that the Commissioners
court confirmed the record that it was not our intention to run the swimming
pool.
>> that's correct.
>> we hoped to contract that out.
>> it's still our intent.
>> okay. Did we check with the ymca about running it for
us?
>> yes, we have. And I think they are just waiting to see
that this is actually going to be done.
>> so we are still hopeful that the ymca, who by the way
does a fantastic job of operating the swimming pools --
>> I am confident that they are still good for their word,
yes.
>> okay. With that, judge, I would like to move approval
of 13 b.
>> now, if you are a home owner I figure that you have no
choice. You actually pay something for the operation of the pool and you are
entitlemented to a half-prized membership whether you use it or not.
>> that's correct.
>> otherwise there's no way for this thing to work financially.
>> that's right.
>> that's part of the deal. So if you require home ownership
out there, this is part of your acquisition.
>> mind you, they would be paying for that if they had the
pool in their subdivision, so it's somewhat of an offset --
>> judge, what's the --
>> the complaints that come in after the opening prove that
we ought to -- [indiscernible]
>> [multiple voices]
>> Commissioner Daugherty.
>> well, I -- I guess my question would be because I remember
when this first came about, I -- I abstained with -- with the pool. Mainly
because I didn't want the county to be in the pool business. And I still think
we will end up in the pool business, even though I think it's great for the
community in east Austin. Using a pool and running a pool and upkeep of a
pool are two different things. I just want to make sure that it almost would
-- would make me feel more comfortable to -- to have a contract in place with
-- with the y saying that they are going to do -- if this is built, then they
are going to take it on. I sure don't want, you know, t.n.r. To number the
pool business. But I guess if -- if you are confident that we are -- that
we need to do this before we get them to sign up, I mean, I will acquiesce
to your better judgment on that, joe. I mean I just --
>> well --
>> the pool will not open for business until there is a third
party operator on contract to operate it or the matter will be brought back
to the Commissioners court.
>> that's right.
>> there's an actual provision, on page 3, item no. 8, ymca
as project operator. That we upon completion of the project, the county will
enter into a contract with ymca or another qualified pool operator. So I think
that it's there that we are not it.
>> it's there. So --
>> any more discussion of b? All in favor? That passes by
unanimous vote. C?
>> the contribution of the capital contribution from d.r.
Horton and rathgeber enabled us to match a grant with the Texas parks and
wildlife department basically a 50/50 grant. We were able to leverage that
money to get another $500,000 from the state for improvements within east
metro park. Not only did it provide a capital match, it also boosted our --
our points up in the competition so that we were competitive in a state-wide
competition. So it actually did two things for us. Now, the other $500,000
will be going into things like -- like a fishing pier, wetlands planning,
disc golf, basketball court and other recreational amenities within the park.
It really now starts to diversify what we can have within east metro park.
It really was a win for everybody. This is the contract bid that will allow
us to receive the grant funds.
>> the bid of this, non-county funding, really goes to pay
for the school and these other amenities.
>> that's correct.
>> and by the way, your staff did a real good job of creatively
generating this funding for us.
>> right.
>> half million from the state of Texas, parks department.
And another half million from the developer, homeowners out there in this
area and all of this goes into a county park.
>> it does.
>> to -- to benefit the Travis County residents.
>> it gets the comiewntd what they -- the community what
they said they wanted. These are things that showed up in our public hearings
and meetings as being priorities on what the community wanted in the park.
>> it won't be the Travis County taxpayers picking up almost
a million in additional improvements, which is great.
>> I move approval of 13 c.
>> second.
>> joe, when you operate these [indiscernible], do you normally
contract with the third party operator to provide liability insurance for
swimmers? I know that's probably part of the cost.
>> yes, that's part of the cost of operation is they carry
the insurance policy.
>> the county attorney will advise us aim sure at is some
point in the future to make sure that we have that liability policy in place
on opening day. Any more discussion of 13 c? All in favor? That passes by
unanimous vote. And the easy one, 13 d.
>> judge, we received three bids for this project on September
the 28th. After review by t.n.r. And facilities management, the recommendation
was awarded to c.c. Carlton, industries in the amount of 4,798,929.50. This
does come in under budget. And in c.c. Carlton's bid, they did disclose to
us that they had three osha violations in the past three years. Upon review,
excuse me, of those violations, there were two trenching safety violations
and one protective equipment violation and in both cases corrective measures
were taken and fines were actually assessed and paid. Cc carlton, I believe
you got this late yesterday, asked them for a letter with their understanding
that we are very concerned about these issues and that we do not want a repeat
on our project of these type of violations. They in response said that they
had hired a safety inspector who will be out there on the project and of course
roger and joe's staff will be out there making sure that they don't violate
these. On the basis of our review of it, we believe that we can still make
a recommendation to Commissioners court to award to mr. Carlton's group. If
you will recall, he was the contractor on our southeast metro park and we
worked favorably with him and northeast. And we did work well with him on
these projects. We are -- it is the recommendation that we reject the bid
alternates a and g. And a was for infrastructure for a meeting facility and
we will be rejecting that because the decision has been made that the meeting
facility will not be constructed. And then on alternate g, there was not a
substantial savings to change the sidewalk material from concrete to asphalt.
So we need to reject those two bid alternate items.
>> have we advised the residents who were involved that the
meeting facility has been pulled?
>> my -- I have not, no.
>> we need to do that, don't we?
>> we probably do, yeah.
>> it can always be included in a later phase -- [multiple
voices]
>> don't want to make promise owes owe the decision today
is to pull that meeting facility out, I assume we are pulling it out because
of budget. We simply can't afford it at this time.
>> that's correct.
>> on if it -- to come up in the future it's a matter to
be department with at another date, I guess. The other thing is mr. Carlton
I think does a good job of explaining prevention measure that's he has taken
to -- to keep some of safety issues from -- from arising on this project.
I think Commissioners court outing to incorporate -- ought to incorporate
his reputations in the October 6th 2004 letter into our contract with him
because we -- we plan for him -- for him to meet these.
>> uh-huh.
>> right.
>> so during our project, it was -- it would seem to me that
we would want these safety features kept in place. Otherwise I think we ought
to have serious issues with -- with those safety issues that were raised.
But this makes me feel much better. But I feel a whole lot better if we incorporate
this letter into the -- into the contract, one, and, two, put him on notice
that we have done that and that we expect to see him meet these standards.
As he promises.
>> okay. I think that -- I think that we can incorporate
the letter, but I think by the contract terms, itself, he is required to meet
osha standards. So -- so we can work with the lawyers to incorporate the letter.
But he is required by law to meet those osha requirements. And he -- they
hired the safety officer to -- to be out there to make sure that [indiscernible]
on that project.
>> I would like to move approval of 13 d, with the award
the contract to c.c. Carlton industrial, ltd, as the low bidder, in the mment
of $4,798,929.50. And we also reject alternate bid a and g and we also include
in this particular contract the safety issues letter that was forthcoming
from c.c. Tarlton industries to ensure that these features are followed and
these particular safety measures are left intact with this particular contract
during the work for Travis County. With that I would like to move approval.
>> second.
>> okay. Now, speaking specifically, he says he has retained
the service of mr. [indiscernible] with safety solutions to make onsite inspections
on each of our projects. So -- so basically our endanger operating this into
the contract to me says you united to keep -- you need to keep safety solutions
in place or if you have another one then we need to know who that other one
is and then these safety inspections need to be done. Now, does osha require
that?
>> I don't believe that they require that level. They just
require that they meet those --
>> that's exactly my point. So we pull this one into it.
Quarterly safety meetings and on site -- tool box safety meetings, weekly.
I expect him to keep those. Then the third one is employee orientation, training,
safety, et cetera, we expect that to be done during the entirety of this contract.
Those specifics I think are what we need to call his attention -- we needs
to know Travis County is relying on you to do these things, periodically I
would think that we need to check. If not we need to call it to his attention,
while he's on this project, the safety features really become our concern
as much as his since it's a county project.
>> judge, once it's incorporated into the contract, I would
make sure that those -- that those three things and safety personnel are on
site on a daily basis.
>> right.
>> and in fairness to him, he has worked with us on two or
three other projects and has country a good job coming in under budget. So
we know he'll perform well. But the safety issues involved in life threatening
situations for workers and Travis County has a responsibility there, too.
So I知 a little bit more concerned than usual.
>> do we need to have an official mod to this contract or
are we just going to bring it back as a mod?
>> well, it --
>> I think that you could approve the contract with the modification
-- [multiple voices]
>> with the correct signature?
>> right.
>> if you sees this discussion on tv, he'll -- [indiscernible]
[laughter]
>> if that were part of what you accept the judge as part
-- as part of the motion with those safety modifications being inclusive in
the contract itself, that's still part of the whole --
>> the other thing is notification to the residents.
>> right.
>> of the.
>> right.
>> meeting facilities because of lack of funding.
>> right.
>> not that we all of a sudden lost interest, we just ran
out of money.
>> how can it be done as far as notifying --
>> I will -- I will probably put on a press release and make
sure that copies of that get to the neighborhood.
>> please do.
>> okay.
>> judge, the only other thing that I would highlight is
that he has committed to a 24% h.u.b. Participation on this project, so we
will be monitoring the h.u.b. Participation.
>> okay. Commissioner Davis says we surely want him to be
safe out there now. That's good news.
>> yeah. All in favor? D. A contract award to t that passes
by unanimous vote.
>> joe, I would like to say before you leave the table and
stuff, I would like to thank all of you, Travis County staff, cyd your shop,
I mean all of you, y'all have been just remarkable. The residents of course
when you stated earlier, we've had many, many, many public meetings out there
in the community and we are bringing a product to a community that is in desperate
need of this type of -- of -- of venture. So it's very important that we continue
to work together. The folks at rathgeber, bill nash, those folks, the homeowners
association out there, prior creek along with the -- brier creek along with
the continental homes, the Texas wildlife, parks and wildlife department.
I mean that's just remarkable what they allowed us to do and how you worked
with them to make sure that we can get this amount of money without it going
to the taxpayers for that. Those are remarkable feat, again I would like to
thank the Commissioners court for having the vision along with the community
to bring this about. This is another great day in Travis County, bringing
something to a part of the county where the quality of life may not be as
significant as forthcoming as other areas, this will really help folks to
keep from going to bastrop county and spending it over there, they can spend
it all in Travis County. Thanks.
>> I would like to extend that thank you to rathgeber, the
folks at d.r. Horton who have worked height mightily -- worked mightily with
us. Many hours went into this contract to do all of the stuff that we need
to do. I知 really appreciate with their help. I would also like to announce
that we are planning a ground breaking for October 30th, which is Saturday,
10:30 a.m. We hope to have kind of a halloween event. Maybe some hay rides
on the site, give people tours of the property, then have an official ground
breaking prior to construction.
>> this is the beginning of construction, not the true opening.
>> that's correct [laughter]
>> too cold, judge.
>> pool opening.
>> pool opening still scheduled for June?
>> that's right.
>> June when the pool will be opened? Okay.
>> I would just like to say that contrary to some believes,
we do have some really good teams in this county who work really well together,
these kind of projects are fun because you see result, it makes me proud to
be an employee at Travis County.
>> thank you, cyd.
>> thank you all, very, very much. Thank you, thank you court.
We did vote on that, right? Passed by unanimous vote.
>> thank you.
The Closed Caption log for this Commissioners Court agenda item is provided by Travis County Internet Services. Since this file is derived from the Closed Captions created during live cablecasts, there are occasional spelling and grammatical errors. This Closed Caption log is not an official record the Commissioners Court Meeting and cannot be relied on for official purposes. For official records please contact the County Clerk at (512) 854-4722.
Last Modified: Wednesday, October 26, 2005 3:38 PM